Democratic Northwest. [volume] (Napoleon, Ohio) 1869-1894, 1887-10-20
"ARNICA."
"CANAL DOODLE" "
"COme Down, Mr.. Flick. -
An Interesting Letter from o. @. Bar
ber,
A Leading Republican of Akron.
who tells what he knows about
the Canal Steal in that
CITY.
He lets Foraker Slide and Holds on
to Arnica Flick.
To the Editor of Enquirer.

To the Editor Of Enquirer.
AKRON, o., OCT. s, 1887.
In your paper of the first inst, on
page 8, there appears an article headed
"Canal Boodle," written in q way that
many careless readers would pronounce
me as witness against the ability and
integrity of Governor Foraker.
After the SO called issue was made to
Mr.. Jackson by the Board of Public
Works, the matter was published in our
city papers as an item of news, being
the first that was known of the matter,
generally speaking, in our city. 1t soon
caused comment, and owners of pro-
perty abutting on the basin protested,
and several injunction suits were
brought against Mr.. Jackson, seeking
to restrain him from improving the
property. The matter was investigated
by the attorneys of interested parties,
and it was found that the Board of Pub
lie Works had no authority i'm the law
to make such leases. Thereupon Mr..
Jackson, through his attorneys and
friends, went to the Legislature, asking
that they confirm the lease of the
Board, and the matter came up in the
Lower House and was referred to the
Committee on Public Works. Know
ing of the value of the property, and
the injustice done the State in the mat
ter, I addressed the following letter to
Hon. Geo. w. Grouse, then member
of the Ohio State Senate:
AKRON. O., March 16, 1886.
, Hon. Geo. w. Grouse, Columbus,
Ohio-Dedr Sir: Not having the time
to go to Columbus to give my views in
person, ] take the liberty of addressing
you the committee having the matter
in charge, upon the matter of Iegisla-
tion confirming the so-called lease
made by the Board of Public Works of
the Canal Basin, and of between 100
and $50 feet frontage on Exchange
street in this city, to Andrew jackson
for the nominal sum of one hundred
dollars ($100) per annum for the period
of thirty years. In the estimation of
many, this property is worth one thous-
and dollars per year, and in talking
with Mr.. Jackson on the subject soon
after the matter had been announced
in the papers of our city, he said to me
that he considered his bargain worth
ten thousand dollars ($10, ,O00). Can it
be possible that so valuable a property
can be held of so little account by our
State authorities?
You, Mr.. Grouse, will remember that
L was one of a party that bought of you
and Others a small tract, not so favora-
bly, located as this property for the
lumber business, and withouta frontage
on any thoroughfare such as Exchange
street, and paid for the same So 900, and
we considered it very cheap at that. /
would willingly give for fee of the
basin aud frontage on Exchange street
$4,000 as starter if it could be put up
at auction, and think it would bring
much more.
Mr.. Jackson is a very hard man to
compete with, at least in the lumber
business, and to be able to lease such
property for $100 per annum, without
taxes to pay, would make him still
harder competitor, and do US all great
injustice. IF the State desires to lease
this property or to sell it, it would seem
proper that it be struck Off to the
highest bidder.
It will not do for Mr.. jackson to
come forward and say las we surmise
he willy that he took the lease in good
faith and went on and expended large
sums ofmoney for Improvement on this
property, for which reason the lease
should be confirmed, for he has been OPP
posed at every step in this matter by
iniunctions of our Courts and by advice
of interested parties. Nor will it do TO
say that he is helping the business OF
the canal to the extent that they are